Hemodynamic study of serial double-filtration plasmapheresis

Effects of different lipoprotein apheresis methods on serum protein levels

BACKGROUND

A total plasma exchange was the first extracorporeal method to treat patients with severe hypercholesterolemia. But in the long run it has several disadvantages. The newer lipoprotein apheresis (LA) methods claim to be more selective with respect to the removal of atherogenic lipoproteins and thus are supposed to avoid an additional protein loss.

METHODS

We wanted to compare the effect of these methods on serum protein concentrations (total serum protein, albumin, proteins measured with electrophoresis, immunoglobulins, fibrinogen, transferrin, and ferritin) which were checked before and after a single LA session in 75 patients. All patients underwent active LA treatment using 6 different LA methods (HELP, TheraSorb(®) LDL, DALI, Lipidfiltration, Liposorber D, MONET). Post-apheresis concentrations were corrected for changes in hematocrit.

RESULTS

The slightest impact on total serum protein was observed with the whole-blood methods. Liposorber D showed the least reduction of albumin levels. All LA methods had a small effect on alpha1-globulins and beta-globulins, but alpha2-and gamma-globulins were reduced to a different extent. A major effect was seen on the immunoglobulins when filtration methods were applied. In the patients treated with MONET, both pre- and post-apheresis Immunoglobulin M concentrations were below the normal range. HELP and the filtration methods significantly reduced the fibrinogen concentrations. The filtration methods also decreased ferritin levels but the post-apheresis ferritin levels were still in the normal range.

CONCLUSION

All LA methods had an influence on protein concentrations. At present, these findings will not yield an individualized treatment approach for any selective LA method due to the lack of prospective comparative studies. At minimum, special attention should be paid to protein concentrations in patients suffering from protein deficit.

The effect of plasmapheresis on blood pressure in voluntary plasma donors

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Donor plasmapheresis involves the removal of a weight-adjusted volume of plasma and the return of cellular components to the donor. Although plasma volume generally returns to normal, some residual effect on vital signs may be possible. This analysis was performed to determine the possible effects of plasmapheresis on blood pressure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 16-week study was conducted to evaluate the effects of plasma donations on cholesterol levels in healthy donors. From this study, the vital signs obtained prior to donation were analysed using statistical and dynamic analytical predictive models.

RESULTS

Preliminary analyses revealed a change in systolic and diastolic blood pressure from the corresponding baseline values (Pearson Coefficient -0.44 and -0.47, respectively). Statistical models predicted a marked decrease in systolic and diastolic blood pressure following multiple donations in donors with baseline pressure in the Stage 2 hypertension range with less pronounced decreases predicted in Stage 1 donors. Little or no change in blood pressure was predicted in donors with baseline normal blood pressure or prehypertension. Dynamic models including time between donations supported these results and predicted a recovery period of about 14 days without donation in donors with Stage 2 baseline levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that systolic and diastolic blood pressure may be decreased following plasmapheresis used for plasma donations at intervals of <14 days in donors with high baseline blood pressure levels.

Double filtration plasmapheresis in antibody-incompatible kidney transplantation

Double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP) was used in preference to plasma exchange in our program of antibody-incompatible transplantation, to treat higher volumes of plasma. Forty-two patients had 259 sessions of DFPP, 201 pre-transplant and 58 post-transplant. At the first treatment session, the mean plasma volume treated was 3.81 L (range 3-6 L), 55.5 mL/kg (range 36.2-83.6 mL/kg). Serum IgG fell by mean 59.4% (SD 10.2%), and IgM by 69.3% (SD 16.1%). Nine patients did not require increases in plasma volumes treated, and six did not tolerate higher plasma volumes. In the remaining patients, the mean maximum plasma volume treated pre-transplant was 6.67 L (range 4-15 L), 96.1 mL/kg (range 60.2-208.9 mL/kg). The complement dependent cytotoxic crossmatch was positive in 14 cases pre-treatment, and remained positive in six (42.8%) cases. The flow cytometric crossmatch was positive in 29 cases pre-treatment, and in 21 (72.4%) after DFPP. Post-transplant, DFPP was ineffective at reducing donor specific antibody levels during periods of rapid donor specific antibody synthesis. Post-transplant, the one year graft survival rate was 94%, although there was a high rate of early rejection. In summary, DFPP enabled the treatment of plasma volumes that were almost double those that would have been feasible with plasma exchange. Despite this, most patients were transplanted with a positive crossmatch, and DFPP post-transplant was unable to control rising antibody levels.

Complications of double-filtration plasmapheresis

BACKGROUND

Double-filtration plasmapheresis (DFP) removes high-molecular-weight molecules semiselectively, thereby minimizing albumin loss, but with subsequent need for fluid substitution. The purpose of this study was to establish the overall incidence of complications during DFP and to analyze the possible contributory factors.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

From November 1993 to October 2003, a total of 2502 plasmapheresis procedures were performed during 515 courses of plasmapheresis in 335 patients. The medical and technical records for these patients were reviewed.

RESULTS

The overall frequency of complications was 67.5 percent per patient, 60.0 percent per course, and 26.3 percent per procedure. The rate of major complications was 18.2 percent of patients, 13.2 percent of courses, and 2.7 percent of procedures. Hemolysis, the most common complication of DFP, occurred in 20 percent of patients. A total of 83 (3.3%) episodes of hypotension were documented in 63 patients. Vascular-access-related complications constituted approximately 17 percent of the total. There was one documented episode of clinically overt bleeding from laboratory coagulopathy necessitating infusion of fresh plasma to stop bleeding. There was no allergic reaction or mortality associated with the DFP procedures. The per-patient frequency of hypotension was higher in cases of chronic inflammatory neuropathy (35.1%) compared to the other illness categories (15.4%-17.3%), with marginal significance demonstrated (p = 0.0611).

CONCLUSION

The safety of DFP treatment has been confirmed by this study. High-risk patients should be monitored carefully during treatment to minimize the occurrence of complications.